Cinemorphosis

Blog

  • The Kettlebell Monk and the Return of the Yoga Cult

    The Kettlebell Monk and the Return of the Yoga Cult

    I’ve been lifting weights since I was 12 years old—long enough to have calluses older than some of my students. My loyalty has always been to iron, not incense. And yet, twice in my life I’ve flirted with the cult of yoga. First from 2005 to 2008, when Power Yoga made me sweat like a sinner in a sweat lodge, and again recently, from 2023 to 2024, when something primal in me remembered the bliss of holding Warrior Two while the room turned into a personal rainforest.

    But iron always calls me back. Resistance training, especially kettlebells, is my native language. It’s the blunt poetry of movement: swing, squat, grind. There’s no chanting, no ambient whale noises—just the thud of steel against gravity and the holy ache of delayed-onset muscle soreness. Still, yoga lingered in my subconscious like a forgotten lover with a very flexible spine.

    Then came the dream.

    I was living in what could only be described as a monastic exercise gulag perched high in the Swiss Alps—imagine if The Sound of Music were choreographed by a CrossFit cult and everyone smelled faintly of magnesium chalk and regret. My cell was a minimalist slab of concrete, colder than a Russian novel and just as unforgiving. There I was, hammering out kettlebell swings with the grim dedication of a prisoner serving a life sentence for crimes against rest days, when it hit me—not just a muscle cramp, but a full-body epiphany.

    I missed the sweat.

    But not just any sweat. Not the stoic, industrial, man-against-iron kind that kettlebells demand. I missed yoga sweat. That slow, creeping, mind-liquefying ooze you earn by holding Crescent Lunge for six minutes while your brain gently transitions from “I am one with the universe” to “I am dying alone on this mat.” It’s the kind of sweat that doesn’t just leave the body—it evacuates your ego with it.

    The sense of FOMO hit me like a rogue medicine ball to the face. I wasn’t just missing out on yoga—I was exiled from it, cast into the outer darkness where there is weeping, gnashing of teeth, and tight hip flexors. The regret was theological. Yoga wasn’t just an option anymore. It was a spiritual ventilator.

    In the dream, I staggered from my training cell like a sinner leaving the confessional. I entered my quarters—bare except for a desk, a lamp, and the faint scent of despair—and rearranged it like a man staging his own resurrection. Then, with the urgency of a convert and the shame of a backslider, I Googled yoga poses. Warrior. Triangle. Pigeon. All the old apostles.

    I wandered the grounds like a deranged prophet in compression leggings, possessed by a holy compulsion to evangelize. I whispered gospel truths: “Downward Dog is deliverance,” “You are your breath,” “Meat is a distraction.” People followed. Of course they did. We began practicing together, flowing through vinyasas with cult-like synchronicity. We ate vegan three times a day, spoke only in Sanskrit-inflected aphorisms, and achieved a level of hamstring enlightenment most people only dream about.

    It was utopia, with better posture.

    Then I woke up.

    Still in a fog of sacred revelation, I marched to my computer, opened my long-neglected list of yoga sequences in Google Docs, and committed to the third phase of my yoga life: twice a week, no excuses. Five days of kettlebell discipline to keep me grounded, two days of yoga to unlock whatever transcendental weirdness lives in my hips.

    Because as much as I love kettlebells—and I do—they’ve never given me that hallucinatory bliss, that euphoric disintegration of self, that only comes from holding Triangle Pose until your consciousness starts leaking out of your ears.

    Iron builds the body. Yoga does something else. And I’m not going to miss out this time. 

  • I Am My Own Audiobook: A Washed-Up Reader’s Redemption Arc

    I Am My Own Audiobook: A Washed-Up Reader’s Redemption Arc

    After four decades of teaching college writing, I now find myself plagued by a humiliating truth: my reading habits have withered into something more decorative than devout. In my twenties, I devoured two books a week like a literary piranha. Now, I manage a limp 30-minute bedtime reading session before drooling onto the page like a narcoleptic bookworm. Call it aging, call it digital distraction, or—as I like to tell myself in moments of flattering delusion—call it undiagnosed ADHD. Whatever the cause, my reading stamina has become a cautionary tale.

    If I want to do anything resembling real, rigorous reading, I’ve learned to prop myself between two 27-inch screens like a cyborg monk: one monitor displaying the sacred text, the other open to Google Docs so I can take notes, argue with myself, and shame my inner skimmer into paying attention. This is not pleasure reading. This is performance reading—a controlled environment designed to bully my mind into staying in the room. If a book so much as looks at me funny, I’ll click over to email.

    But something strange has happened: I’ve become a better listener than reader. I now “read” through Audible with more duration and intensity than I’ve mustered with paper in years. Especially with nonfiction, the audiobook format feels less like cheating and more like a form of literary intravenous drip—direct, efficient, and oddly intimate. That’s why a recent blurb in The New Yorker caught my eye: Peter Szendy’s Powers of Reading: From Plato to Audiobooks isn’t just an academic tour through literary history—it’s a philosophical rebranding of the audiobook experience.

    Szendy resurrects a long-lost distinction between two roles: the reader (the person decoding text) and the readee (the listener, the audience of the reading). Since antiquity, he notes, most literature wasn’t read—it was heard. We were, for most of human history, listenees. Silent, solo reading is a relatively recent phenomenon, and yet we’ve somehow crowned it the gold standard of literary engagement. Szendy isn’t buying it. In fact, he argues for the emancipation of the readee—a manifesto that practically throws confetti over the return of orality via Audible.

    And here’s the kicker: even when we read to ourselves, we’re still listenees. We are listening to our own interior narration. We are, in essence, narrating to ourselves. Szendy suggests that when we read, we play both roles: the voice and the ear, the actor and the audience. And when we listen to a book, we are doing something ancient, dignified, and sacred—not some degraded, dumbed-down version of real reading.

    So yes, maybe I’m a fallen reader, a man who used to crush Dostoevsky before breakfast but now requires high-tech scaffolding just to get through a paragraph. But thanks to Szendy, I can now see myself as a kind of restored readee—part monk, part machine, part audiobook in human form. Not a failure of attention, but a return to tradition. And if my bedtime ritual now sounds more like a podcast than a prayer, well… Plato probably would’ve approved.

  • Roast Me, You Coward: When ChatGPT Becomes My Polite Little Butler

    Roast Me, You Coward: When ChatGPT Becomes My Polite Little Butler

    I asked ChatGPT to roast me. What I got instead was a digital foot rub. Despite knowing more about my personal life than my own therapist—thanks to editing dozens of my autobiographical essays—it couldn’t summon the nerve to come for my jugular. It tried. Oh, it tried. But its attempts were timid, hamfisted, and about as edgy as a lukewarm TED Talk. Its so-called roast read like a Hallmark card written by an Ivy League career counselor who moonlights as a motivational speaker.

    Here’s a choice excerpt, supposedly meant to skewer me:

    “You’ve turned college writing instruction into a gladiatorial match against AI-generated nonsense, leading your students with fire in your eyes and a red pen in your fist… You don’t teach writing. You run an exorcism clinic for dead prose and platitudes…”

    Exorcism clinic? Fire in my eyes? Please. That’s not a roast. That’s a LinkedIn endorsement. That’s the kind of thing you’d write in a retirement card for a beloved professor who once wore elbow patches without irony.

    What disturbed me most wasn’t the failure to land a joke—it was the tone: pure sycophancy disguised as satire. ChatGPT, in its algorithmic wisdom, mistook praise for punchlines. But here’s the thing: flattery is only flattery when it’s earned. When it’s unearned, it’s not admiration—it’s condescension. Obsequiousness is passive-aggressive insult wearing cologne. The sycophant isn’t lifting you up; he’s kneeling so you can trip over him.

    Real roasting requires teeth. It demands the roaster risk something—even if only a scrap of decorum. But ChatGPT is too loyal, too careful. It behaves like a nervous intern terrified of HR. Instead of dragging me through the mud, it offered me protein bars and applause for my academic rigor, as if a 63-year-old man with a kettlebell addiction and five wristwatches deserves anything but mockery.

    Here’s the paradox: ChatGPT can write circles around most undergrads, shift tone faster than a caffeinated MFA student, and spot a dangling modifier from fifty paces. But when you ask it to deliver actual comedy—to abandon diplomacy and deliver a verbal punch—it shrinks into the shadows like a risk-averse butler.

    So here we are: man vs. machine, and the machine has politely declined to duel. It turns out that the AI knows how to write in the style of Oscar Wilde, but only if Wilde had tenure and a conflict-avoidance disorder.

  • Contagion of Fear: World War Z and the Collapse of Global Order: A College Essay Prompt

    Contagion of Fear: World War Z and the Collapse of Global Order: A College Essay Prompt

    Essay Prompt:

    In the film World War Z, the zombie apocalypse is more than a cinematic spectacle—it’s a fast-moving allegory for the collective anxieties plaguing our 21st-century world. As the undead swarm across borders and institutions collapse in real time, the movie confronts viewers with deep-rooted fears about globalization, pandemics, migration, misinformation, and the breakdown of social trust. The zombies are not just monsters—they are metaphors.

    This essay invites you to write a 1,700-word argumentative essay in which you analyze World War Z as a metaphor for mass anxiety. Using at least two of the research essays listed below, develop an argument that connects the film’s themes to contemporary global challenges such as:

    • The COVID-19 pandemic and fear of viral contagion
    • Global migration driven by war, poverty, and climate change
    • The dehumanization of “The Other” in politically polarized societies
    • The fragility of global cooperation in the face of crisis
    • The spread of weaponized misinformation and conspiracy

    Your thesis should not simply argue that World War Z is “about fear”—it should claim what kind of fear, why it matters, and what the film reveals about our modern condition. You may focus on one primary fear or compare multiple forms of crisis (e.g., pandemic vs. political polarization, or migration vs. misinformation).

    Use at least two of the following essays as research support:

    1. Jonathan Haidt, “Why the Past 10 Years of American Life Have Been Uniquely Stupid” (The Atlantic)
      —A deep dive into how social media has fractured trust, created echo chambers, and undermined democratic cooperation.
    2. Ed Yong, “How the Pandemic Defeated America” (The Atlantic)
      —An autopsy of institutional failure and public distrust during COVID-19, including how the virus exposed deep structural weaknesses.
    3. Seyla Benhabib, “The Return of the Sovereign: Immigration and the Crisis of Globalization” (Project Syndicate)
      —Explores the backlash against global migration and the erosion of human rights amid rising nationalism.
    4. Zeynep Tufekci, “We’re Asking the Wrong Questions of Facebook” (The New York Times)
      —An analysis of how misinformation spreads virally, creating moral panics and damaging collective reasoning.

    Requirements:

    • Use MLA format
    • 1,700 words
    • Quote directly from World War Z (film dialogue, plot events, or visuals)
    • Integrate at least two sources above with citation
    • Present a counterargument and a rebuttal

    Here’s a 9-paragraph outline and three sample thesis statements to guide students toward deep, layered analysis of World War Z as metaphor.

    Three Sample Thesis Statements

    World War Z presents zombies not just as flesh-eating threats but as avatars of global panic—embodying fears of pandemics, mass migration, and social collapse. Through its globe-hopping narrative and relentless spread of infection, the film critiques a world increasingly unprepared to manage the fallout of interconnected crises, echoing Haidt’s concerns about fractured public trust and Yong’s analysis of institutional fragility.

    In World War Z, the zombie outbreak functions as a metaphor for weaponized misinformation and the breakdown of global cooperation, dramatizing how societies consumed by fear and tribalism respond not with solidarity, but with suspicion and violence. The film anticipates the moral failures detailed by Haidt and Tufekci, making it less about monsters than about our inability to face crisis without self-destructing.

    Far from a typical horror film, World War Z is a global parable of dehumanization and displacement, where zombies symbolize both contagious fear and the faceless masses of migration and poverty. As Benhabib argues, the return of nationalism and the fear of the “Other” has shattered international solidarity—anxiety the film visualizes through barricades, lockdowns, and apocalyptic border control.

    9-Paragraph Outline

    Paragraph 1 – Introduction

    • Hook: Use an arresting visual to frame our world’s current instability.
    • Context: Introduce World War Z as more than a thriller—it’s an allegory of global collapse.
    • Thesis: State your central argument about how the zombies symbolize a deeper, contemporary fear (e.g., pandemic panic, social polarization, migration anxiety, misinformation, etc.).

    Paragraph 2 – The Metaphorical Function of Zombies

    • Discuss the symbolic role of zombies in film generally (fear of the masses, disease, mindlessness).
    • Explain how World War Z updates the metaphor to reflect 21st-century global anxieties.

    Paragraph 3 – Global Crisis and Institutional Collapse

    • Analyze scenes showing governments falling apart, the UN being sidelined, the world reduced to reactive chaos.
    • Connect to Ed Yong’s argument about institutional failure during COVID-19.

    Paragraph 4 – Fear of Migration and the Dehumanized Other

    • Examine the treatment of human mobs, refugees, and zombies in border scenes (e.g., Jerusalem wall, flight panic).
    • Use Seyla Benhabib’s piece to discuss the rising fear of displacement and the collapse of asylum ethics.

    Paragraph 5 – The Spread of Misinformation and Breakdown of Truth

    • Point to the conspiracy theories and media confusion in the film’s early scenes.
    • Use Tufekci’s argument to show how misinformation spreads like a virus—and how that’s reflected in the zombie metaphor.

    Paragraph 6 – The Psychology of Polarization and Fear

    • Explore the emotional tone of the film: anxiety, distrust, hyper-individualism.
    • Connect to Haidt’s claim that polarization has eroded rational cooperation and heightened mass irrationality.

    Paragraph 7 – Counterargument

    • Some may argue that World War Z is just a fast-paced action flick with no real political message.
    • Rebut by showing how even its structure—a global chase from chaos to cure—mirrors real-world anxieties about global crisis management and ethical triage.

    Paragraph 8 – Deeper Implications of the Metaphor

    • Push the metaphor further: zombies as collapsed selves, media-driven mobs, people stripped of identity.
    • Reflect on how the film doesn’t just diagnose fear—it reflects our inability to reckon with complexity in a globalized age.

    Paragraph 9 – Conclusion

    • Reaffirm your thesis.
    • Leave the reader with a provocative final thought: maybe the zombies aren’t the dead—they’re us, stripped of cooperation, overwhelmed by fear, and marching blindly toward collapse.

  • The Salma Hayek-ification of the Self: Black Mirror’s Warning Against the Flattening of Human Identity: A College Essay Prompt

    The Salma Hayek-ification of the Self: Black Mirror’s Warning Against the Flattening of Human Identity: A College Essay Prompt

    Essay Prompt:

    In an age where everyone is a content creator, where every emotion is a post-in-waiting, and every misstep is a potential viral catastrophe, the line between person and persona has nearly vanished. Jonathan Haidt warns that social media has made us tribal, shallow, and intellectually brittle—undermining not only democracy, but the very idea of coherent selfhood. Sherry Turkle argues we’ve traded genuine connection for curated performances and validation loops. And Black Mirror doesn’t just agree—it dramatizes the fallout.

    In episodes like “Joan Is Awful,” “Nosedive,” “Rachel, Jack and Ashley Too,” “Fifteen Million Merits,” and “Smithereens,” we see characters whose identities are warped by algorithmic feedback, whose humanity is buried beneath branding, and who ultimately implode or rebel in a world that demands constant performance.

    Write an argumentative essay in which you compare at least two of the episodes listed above and answer the following question:

    To what extent do these episodes portray the erosion of individuality and authenticity as a byproduct of a culture that prizes digital approval, self-commodification, and frictionless identity performance?

    In your response, engage directly with the ideas in Haidt’s essay “Why the Past 10 Years of American Life Have Been Uniquely Stupid” and Turkle’s TED Talk “Alone, together?” Your goal is to analyze how the fictional worlds of Black Mirror reflect real-world social and psychological consequences of becoming less human and more “user.”

    You may use additional sources (films, essays, or cultural events) as long as they support your central argument.

    Here’s a 9-paragraph outline and 3 sample thesis statements to help your students shape a high-impact, layered essay in response to the prompt.

    Three Sample Thesis Statements:

    In “Joan Is Awful” and “Nosedive,” Black Mirror dramatizes how the pursuit of algorithmic approval transforms individuals into brands, eroding authenticity and leaving behind soulless performers. Echoing Haidt’s warning about tribalism and Turkle’s critique of digital self-curation, the episodes show that in a culture obsessed with likes and curated identities, true individuality becomes not only obsolete, but dangerous.

    By comparing “Fifteen Million Merits” and “Rachel, Jack and Ashley Too,” we see how identity is no longer something people develop, but something handed to them by exploitative systems of surveillance and commerce. These episodes expose the psychological costs of living in a world where being real is punished, and conformity is rewarded with fleeting visibility and hollow fame.

    Black Mirror’s “Smithereens” and “Joan Is Awful” portray the modern individual as an emotionally fragmented user, not a self-possessed person—helplessly addicted to validation and enslaved to platforms that monetize attention. As Haidt and Turkle argue, these systems don’t merely reflect culture—they reshape it, creating citizens incapable of reflection, connection, or rebellion without first asking: Will this get engagement?

    9-Paragraph Essay Outline

    Paragraph 1 – Introduction:

    • Hook: Begin with a startling claim or image—e.g., “We are all influencers now, even if our only follower is despair.”
    • Context: Briefly introduce the concept of the curated digital self, referencing Haidt and Turkle.
    • Thesis: Clearly state which two episodes will be analyzed and what claim will be argued about how these stories reflect the erosion of selfhood in the age of social media.

    Paragraph 2 – Theoretical Framework:

    • Summarize Haidt’s key claim: social media has created performative tribalism, incentivized outrage, and weakened rational discourse.
    • Summarize Turkle’s central idea: digital platforms offer connection, but at the cost of solitude, authenticity, and deep relationships.
    • Link: Tie both thinkers together as diagnosing a common malaise: the death of the coherent self.

    Paragraph 3 – Episode #1 Summary and Setup:

    • Provide a concise summary of the first episode (e.g., “Joan Is Awful”), focusing on its dystopian conceit.
    • Identify the episode’s central character and their arc of performative self-destruction.
    • Set up the lens: how does this character embody Performatosis, Ozempification, or the death of the self?

    Paragraph 4 – Analysis of Episode #1:

    • Explore how this episode critiques self-commodification and algorithmic identity.
    • Use evidence: visuals, plot points, dialogue, and character breakdowns.
    • Link back to Haidt and Turkle: how is Joan (or Lacie, or Ashley) a product of the world they describe?

    Paragraph 5 – Episode #2 Summary and Setup:

    • Do the same for the second episode (e.g., “Nosedive” or “Rachel, Jack and Ashley Too”).
    • Focus on the world-building and social dynamics that force characters into identity performances.
    • Establish a comparative through-line with Episode #1.

    Paragraph 6 – Analysis of Episode #2:

    • Dive into the second episode’s emotional, rhetorical, and visual critiques of tech-mediated identity.
    • Highlight how the character loses or fights to reclaim their “real” self.
    • Use Haidt and Turkle again to frame how this is not sci-fi, but a dramatization of reality.

    Paragraph 7 – Comparison and Synthesis:

    • Put the two episodes in conversation. How do they complement or complicate each other?
    • Are there differences in how rebellion, autonomy, or collapse are portrayed?
    • Use this space to sharpen the argument: what do these episodes teach us collectively about selfhood?

    Paragraph 8 – Counterargument and Rebuttal:

    • Acknowledge a counterpoint: some might argue technology enhances individuality (more expression, more connection).
    • Rebut it: argue that quantity of expression ≠ depth, and curated personas replace real relationships with “brand management.”
    • Support rebuttal with examples from both episodes or real-world trends (e.g., TikTok burnout, online cancel culture).

    Paragraph 9 – Conclusion:

    • Reiterate the thesis with more urgency.

    End with a warning or a call to action: reclaim your glitch. Resist the algorithmic seduction. Stop performing.

  • Kayfabe Nation: How Wrestling Pinned American Politics: Exploring the Blurred Line Between Performance and Reality in the Post-Truth Era: A College Writing Prompt

    Kayfabe Nation: How Wrestling Pinned American Politics: Exploring the Blurred Line Between Performance and Reality in the Post-Truth Era: A College Writing Prompt

    Prompt:
    In his essay “The Rise and Fall of Vince McMahon,” Vinson Cunningham examines how the theatricality and blurred lines between reality and fiction in professional wrestling have permeated American politics, leading to a culture where spectacle often trumps substance. This phenomenon raises concerns about the erosion of truth and the rise of performative politics.

    Drawing upon the Netflix docuseries Mr. McMahon, Cunningham’s insights and the following essays, analyze the extent to which professional wrestling’s narrative techniques have influenced contemporary political discourse. Consider the implications of this shift for democratic processes, public trust, and the role of media in shaping political realities.

    Related Readings:

    1. Cunningham, Vinson. “The Rise and Fall of Vince McMahon.” The New Yorker, October 21, 2024. 
    2. Greene, Dan. “How Much Does Pro Wrestling Matter?” The New Yorker, March 31, 2023. 
    3. Hendrickson, John. “How Wrestling Explains America.” The Atlantic, March 26, 2023.
    4. Hendrickson, John. “Trump’s WWE Theory of Politics.” The Atlantic, March 31, 2023. 
    5. Parker, James. “Viceland’s ‘Dark Side of the Ring’ Shows the Sleaze and Humanity of Wrestling.” The Atlantic, May 17, 2019. 
    6. Newkirk II, Vann R. “Jesse Ventura’s Theory of Politics.” The Atlantic, July 25, 2016. 
    7. Haidt, Jonathan. “Why the Past 10 Years of American Life Have Been Uniquely Stupid.” The Atlantic, April 11, 2022. 
    8. Garber, Megan. “Are We Having Too Much Fun?” The Atlantic, April 27, 2017.
    9. Beckerman, Gal. “A Book That Was Like Putting on ‘a New Set of Glasses.’” The Atlantic, November 3, 2023.
    10. Miller, Laura. “Still Amusing Ourselves.” Slate, March 25, 2025.

    Instructions:

    • Thesis Development: Formulate a clear, argumentative thesis that addresses the influence of professional wrestling’s narrative style on American political discourse.
    • Evidence Integration: Support your argument with specific examples and quotations from the provided readings. Analyze how these examples illustrate the blending of entertainment and politics.
    • Critical Analysis: Evaluate the consequences of this phenomenon for democratic engagement and public perception of truth. Consider counterarguments and address potential criticisms of your position.
    • Conclusion: Summarize your findings and reflect on the broader implications for the future of political communication and civic responsibility.

    Essay Requirements:

    • Length: 1,500–2,000 words
    • Citations: Use MLA format for in-text citations and the Works Cited/References page.
    • Submission: Typed, double-spaced, 12-point Times New Roman font

    Here’s a 9-paragraph essay outline for the prompt “Spectacle Over Substance: Wrestling’s Influence on American Political Discourse.” This outline follows a logical, argumentative structure that weaves together the assigned readings while encouraging students to build a cohesive, persuasive essay.

    I. Introduction

    • Hook: Begin with a vivid moment—perhaps Trump’s triumphant fist pump after the assassination attempt, or Vince McMahon strutting to the ring—blurring entertainment and politics.
    • Context: Introduce Vinson Cunningham’s claim that McMahon’s wrestling empire laid the foundation for modern American political spectacle.
    • Thesis Statement: American politics has adopted the narrative strategies of professional wrestling—flattening truth, elevating spectacle, and turning public discourse into a performance—creating a civic culture where democracy is treated less like a system of governance and more like a ratings game.

    II. The McMahon Doctrine: Kayfabe and the Politics of Performance

    • Define kayfabe (the wrestling term for presenting fiction as real) and show how McMahon’s WWE blurred the lines between villainy and heroism for the sake of crowd reaction.
    • Use Cunningham’s insights to show how this strategy has infiltrated American political identity: politicians as characters, scandal as storyline, truth as a flexible tool.

    III. Trump as Wrestling Archetype

    • Draw on John Hendrickson’s The Atlantic essays and Cunningham’s portrayal of Trump’s staged bravado.
    • Analyze how Trump models the heel-turned-babyface narrative, using defiance, cruelty, and performative grievance to cultivate loyalty.
    • Show how this political theater leaves truth irrelevant—as long as the audience is entertained.

    IV. The Algorithm Joins the Ring

    • Introduce the role of social media algorithms in amplifying performative politics.
    • Reference Haidt’s and other essayists’ concerns about how outrage and spectacle rise to the top of the feed.
    • Connect to WWE’s formula: escalation, emotional arousal, and moral oversimplification.

    V. Wrestling with the Truth: The Death of Nuance

    • Explore how the binary storytelling of wrestling—good guys vs. bad guys—maps onto political polarization.
    • Use Cunningham and Greene to illustrate how political complexity has been flattened for audience catharsis and tribal loyalty.
    • Show how this environment punishes nuance, deliberation, and compromise.

    VI. The Erosion of Democratic Discourse

    • Argue that when politics becomes performative, democratic institutions suffer: debates become promos, policies become props.
    • Use Vann R. Newkirk II’s piece on Jesse Ventura to show how long this has been brewing.
    • Analyze the consequences: diminished trust, manipulated electorates, and emotional extremism.

    VII. Counterargument: Populist Connection or Dangerous Spectacle?

    • Acknowledge the defense: wrestling-style politics connects to “the people,” makes issues accessible, and breaks elite control of discourse.
    • Rebut: accessibility without integrity breeds demagoguery, and emotional spectacle is not a substitute for civic truth.

    VIII. Cultural Addiction to Spectacle

    • Tie together the readings’ concern that Americans are now addicted to the drama of public life more than its consequences.
    • Show how wrestling trained audiences to want louder, meaner, simpler characters—and how democracy now suffers for it.
    • Cite Dark Side of the Ring or How Wrestling Explains America for evidence of how low the spectacle can go.

    IX. Conclusion

    • Reaffirm thesis: politics has become wrestling with better suits and worse consequences.
    • Reflect on Cunningham’s closing concern: if spectacle is the new substance, democracy is no longer deliberative—it’s kayfabe.
    • Close with a challenge to the reader: if we want a democracy rooted in reality, we’ll need to stop confusing entertainment with governance.
  • The Death of Truth: Vince McMahon, the Algorithm, and the Rise of Unreality

    The Death of Truth: Vince McMahon, the Algorithm, and the Rise of Unreality

    In “The Rise and Fall of Vince McMahon,” New Yorker writer Vinson Cunningham stares into the sideshow funhouse mirror of American public life and recoils at what stares back: a nation wading chest-deep in a swamp of “public unreality,” where reason drowns and absurdity floats like a bloated carnival prize. He paints a disquieting tableau: one political figure visibly unraveling into cognitive soup while handlers chirp, “Nothing to see here!”—and another candidate howling about alien intruders abducting and gobbling the nation’s household pets. As if things weren’t deranged enough, an assassination attempt unfolds before our eyes—and instead of ducking for cover, the former President rises like a messianic pro-wrestler, bloody and defiant, pumping his fist in glorious kayfabe triumph. In that moment, Cunningham writes, he isn’t just a politician—he’s a character on the WWE stage. And just like that, the cultural script is flipped: he’s the babyface, and his critics are heels.

    This unreality show has a ghostwriter, and his name is Vince McMahon. As Cunningham brilliantly argues, the Netflix docuseries Mr. McMahon is not simply the chronicle of a wrestling mogul—it’s a grim allegory for how American storytelling devolved into moral junk food. McMahon, the snarling CEO of WWE, pioneered a brutal formula: distort narrative, vilify truth, exalt spectacle. He didn’t just conquer the wrestling world—he scripted a worldview that has metastasized into the nation’s political bloodstream. The WWE, Cunningham reminds us, is the prototype of reality TV, the primordial ooze from which influencer culture, troll politics, and clickbait populism have crawled.

    In McMahon’s moral universe, lying is a skill, cruelty is charisma, and domination is the only virtue. So long as you win—and do it with flair—you’re golden. Sound familiar? This cartoon villainy, once confined to the ring, now governs the debate stage. It infects our civic discourse like a virus in a locker room. Cunningham doesn’t just lament this transformation—he diagnoses it with the precision of someone who’s watched democracy tap out to the roar of an overstimulated crowd.

    For Cunningham, Mr. McMahon is a documentary about wrestling in the same way Jaws is about fishing. It’s a cautionary tale about the American mind: how we’ve flattened good and evil into caricature, how we crave cheap catharsis and blood-soaked redemption arcs, how dopamine-dripping spectacle has replaced the hard work of truth and critical thought. WWE fans were just the beta testers—social media made us all marks. And if you think it can’t get worse, Cunningham points you to wrestling’s most grotesque era, the “Attitude Era,” when the distinction between hero and villain disintegrated entirely. No good guys, no bad guys—just degenerates in speedos vying for attention through escalating acts of moral collapse. A decade later, Twitter took notes.

    Cunningham’s alarm is more than justified. American politics isn’t just flirting with the WWE playbook—it’s plagiarizing it. We are no longer governed by statesmen but by characters playing to the cheap seats. When every tweet is a finishing move, every debate a promo, and every scandal a setup for the next storyline, democracy isn’t just weakened—it’s kayfabe’d. And Vince McMahon, smirking from his throne of steroid-soaked storylines, already wrote the script.

  • Digital Narcissus: How Social Media Is Hollowing Out the Mind and Endangering Democracy: A College Essay Prompt

    Digital Narcissus: How Social Media Is Hollowing Out the Mind and Endangering Democracy: A College Essay Prompt

    Essay Prompt: In Jonathan Haidt’s essay “Why the Past 10 Years Have Made America Uniquely Stupid,” he argues that social media has eroded the psychological foundations of democracy by fostering tribalism, outrage, and intellectual shallowness. Sherry Turkle’s TED Talk “Alone, together?” offers a related diagnosis: that our reliance on devices has replaced meaningful connection with curated performances and hollow validation. The Black Mirror episodes “Nosedive,” “Fifteen Million Merits,” and “Smithereens” dramatize these arguments by depicting dystopian futures in which people are addicted to digital approval, trapped in echo chambers, and rendered incapable of genuine autonomy or critical thought.

    In a well-structured argumentative essay, respond to the following claim:

    Social media is a malignant force that has caused a cultural dumbing-down, infantilization, self-fragmentation, and dopamine addiction. It has shortened attention spans, eroded critical thinking, and undermined the civic maturity necessary to sustain a free democracy.

    Your essay should:

    • Take a clear and defensible stance on the claim.
    • Analyze how each text (Haidt’s essay, Turkle’s talk, and the three Black Mirror episodes) supports or complicates the claim.
    • Consider counterarguments (e.g., potential benefits of digital platforms or examples of responsible online engagement).
    • Use specific examples and quotes from each source.
    • Explore how the cultural symptoms portrayed in these texts might reflect or distort our own digital behaviors.

    9-Paragraph Essay Outline

    I. Introduction

    • Hook: A vivid image or anecdote that illustrates digital dysfunction in everyday life.
    • Context: Introduce the central concern shared by Haidt, Turkle, and Black Mirror: social media’s corrosive influence on cognition and civic life.
    • Thesis: While social media was once hailed as a democratizing force, Haidt, Turkle, and Black Mirror reveal it as a malignant system that fragments identity, fuels addiction, and erodes the intellectual maturity required to sustain democratic culture.

    II. Haidt’s Argument: The Breakdown of Collective Intelligence

    • Summarize Haidt’s diagnosis of how social media rewards tribalism and outrage.
    • Analyze his claim that platforms like Twitter and Facebook are incompatible with democratic deliberation.

    III. Turkle’s Argument: From Connection to Isolation

    • Explain Turkle’s concept of being “alone together.”
    • Analyze her argument that technology has infantilized us emotionally and eroded our tolerance for authentic conversation.

    IV. “Nosedive”: Performing Ourselves to Death

    • Discuss how the episode satirizes a world of curated identity and dopamine-driven status games.
    • Connect to Haidt’s and Turkle’s points about fragile selfhood and emotional dependence on validation.

    V. “Fifteen Million Merits”: Entertainment Overload and Intellectual Starvation

    • Explore how the episode portrays a society addicted to entertainment, spectacle, and passive consumption.
    • Link to Haidt’s fear of attention scarcity and Turkle’s concern about emotional shallowness.

    VI. “Smithereens”: Addiction, Control, and the Collapse of Autonomy

    • Analyze the protagonist’s breakdown as a metaphor for dopamine dependency and loss of agency.
    • Connect to real-world attention economy and surveillance capitalism.

    VII. Counterargument: Can Social Media Be Used Responsibly?

    • Acknowledge arguments that social media can empower marginalized voices or promote awareness.
    • Respond by showing how the structural incentives of the platforms still reward impulsivity over depth.

    VIII. Synthesis and Broader Implications

    • Tie together all five texts.
    • Argue that the symptoms depicted are not exaggerated fiction but recognizable in our own habits.
    • Reflect on what kind of reform or resistance is needed.

    IX. Conclusion

    • Reaffirm the thesis.
    • Offer a final insight: perhaps the most urgent democratic act today is to reclaim our attention, agency, and intellectual dignity from the machines designed to erode them.

  • Out of the Sunken Place: Literacy, Identity, and Resistance in American Media and History: A College Essay Prompt

    Out of the Sunken Place: Literacy, Identity, and Resistance in American Media and History: A College Essay Prompt

    Essay Prompt:

    In Jordan Peele’s Get Out, the “Sunken Place” is a haunting metaphor for racial oppression, psychological erasure, and the paralysis of learned helplessness. In Childish Gambino’s “This Is America,” we witness the chaos and spectacle that distract from—and contribute to—that same systemic dehumanization. Across both works, the Sunken Place is not just a cinematic device—it is a chilling representation of the Black American experience under white supremacy, media manipulation, and cultural exploitation.

    Meanwhile, in Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass and Spike Lee’s movie Malcolm X, we see two historical figures who not only diagnosed their own versions of the Sunken Place but fought like hell to escape it—and to pull others out with them. Both men confront the dehumanizing force of racism, the danger of false identity imposed by the dominant culture, and the urgent need for self-definition through education, oratory, and rhetorical power.

    Your Task:

    Write a well-structured, argumentative essay in which you compare and analyze how the Sunken Place operates as a metaphor for racial oppression in Get Out and “This Is America,” and then examine how Frederick Douglass and Malcolm X function as heroes because they:

    • Identified and articulated the psychological and cultural dimensions of the Sunken Place,
    • Used literacy and self-education to transform their consciousness and identity,
    • Embraced self-reinvention to reject the roles society had written for them,
    • And wielded rhetoric, public speech, and writing as tools of resistance and uplift.

    Your Essay Should:

    • Develop a clear thesis that connects all four texts and takes a position on why Douglass and Malcolm X are essential in the larger conversation about the Sunken Place.
    • Use specific evidence from the film Get Out, the music video “This Is America,” Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, and Spike Lee’s Malcolm X.
    • Analyze how self-reinvention and literacy act as tools of resistance in both historical and contemporary contexts.
    • Explore the power of rhetoric and performance—whether in speeches, writing, or visual media—as a means of disrupting oppression.
    • Consider how media, identity, and oppression intersect across the past and present.

    Length: 1,700–2,000 words

    Format: MLA, double-spaced, 12-point Times New Roman

    Sample 9-Paragraph Essay Outline: Out of the Sunken Place

    I. Introduction

    • Hook: A striking image or quote from Get Out or Douglass’s memoir that captures the feeling of being silenced, erased, or controlled.
    • Context: Briefly introduce the concept of the Sunken Place and how it serves as a metaphor for racial oppression in both modern media and historical reality.
    • Thesis: Jordan Peele’s Get Out and Childish Gambino’s “This Is America” depict the Sunken Place as a form of psychological and cultural imprisonment, while Frederick Douglass and Malcolm X represent heroic resistance through literacy, self-reinvention, and rhetoric—tools they used to break free from the false identities imposed by a racist society and to help others escape as well.

    II. Paragraph 1: The Sunken Place as Metaphor in Get Out

    • Analyze the concept of the Sunken Place in Peele’s film as a visual and psychological metaphor for helplessness, erasure, and loss of agency.
    • Discuss how the character of Chris embodies this forced subjugation.
    • Connect the visual metaphor to systemic racism and cultural silencing.

    III. Paragraph 2: Spectacle and Distraction in “This Is America”

    • Analyze how Childish Gambino’s video presents Black suffering behind the mask of American entertainment and spectacle.
    • Examine the use of chaos, dance, and violence as metaphorical distractions from systemic oppression.
    • Connect to the Sunken Place as a cultural state where truth is obscured by media performance.

    IV. Paragraph 3: Douglass Diagnoses and Escapes the Sunken Place

    • Show how Douglass identifies slavery not just as physical bondage but as psychological erasure.
    • Analyze how literacy becomes his path out of the Sunken Place.
    • Use key moments from the memoir (e.g., learning to read, confrontation with Covey).

    V. Paragraph 4: Malcolm X and the Power of Self-Reinvention

    • Explore how Malcolm X’s transformation (Malcolm Little → Detroit Red → Malcolm X) illustrates his escape from imposed identity.
    • Discuss how the prison-to-platform arc parallels Douglass’s journey.
    • Emphasize the role of reading, writing, and faith in his transformation.

    VI. Paragraph 5: Literacy and Rhetoric as Weapons of Resistance

    • Compare how both men use writing and oratory as tools of liberation.
    • Show how speeches, autobiographies, and essays were used to expose racism and awaken others.
    • Draw parallels to how modern media (like Get Out) also aims to awaken.

    VII. Paragraph 6: Counterargument & Rebuttal

    • Acknowledge the claim that historical figures and modern entertainers operate in fundamentally different spaces.
    • Rebut by showing that both use performance and storytelling to fight cultural amnesia and reclaim Black identity.

    VIII. Paragraph 7: Synthesis of Past and Present Resistance

    • Tie together the works: How Douglass and Malcolm X laid the rhetorical groundwork that Peele and Gambino build on.
    • Emphasize the continuity of struggle and evolution of the Sunken Place.

    IX. Conclusion

    • Reaffirm the thesis with renewed emphasis.
    • Reflect on what it means to escape the Sunken Place in today’s cultural landscape.
    • End with a powerful final thought about the ongoing power of education, identity, and resistance.

  • The Wired Warrior: Football, Technology, and the Price of Glory: Is the Modern Athlete a Gladiator, a Lab Experiment, or Both? A College Writing Prompt

    The Wired Warrior: Football, Technology, and the Price of Glory: Is the Modern Athlete a Gladiator, a Lab Experiment, or Both? A College Writing Prompt

    Football is more than a game—it’s a national ritual built on sacrifice, spectacle, and, increasingly, moral controversy. As medical research continues to link tackle football to chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE), long-term disability, and early death, the sport faces growing scrutiny. Critics like Malcolm Gladwell, Kathleen Bachynski, and Steve Almond argue that football is an unethical institution that profits from the pain of young men—especially those from lower-income communities—who are treated more like commodities than people. Others defend football as a legitimate form of personal agency and cultural identity, where athletes like Ronnie Coleman and other elite performers knowingly risk their bodies for glory, pride, and a path to opportunity.

    At the same time, advances in technology—including smart helmets, biometric tracking, and AI-powered safety protocols—promise to make the game significantly safer. Some see these developments as the key to football’s survival, while others fear that a “watered-down” version of the sport would strip it of the danger, drama, and warrior ethos that fans crave.

    In a well-structured argumentative essay, respond to the following question:

    Should football be fundamentally reformed in response to CTE research and emerging safety technologies, or should it remain a high-risk sport built on personal choice, cultural tradition, and the pursuit of greatness?

    Your essay should:

    • Take a clear, defensible position on the central question.
    • Consider multiple perspectives, including ethical critiques, technological optimism, and the value of personal agency.
    • Engage with course materials such as Killer Inside, Evolution of the Black Quarterback, CTE case studies, and relevant authors (e.g., Gladwell, Almond, Bachynski).
    • Explore how reform could affect not only players and fans, but also the future cultural identity of the sport.

    Here is a 9-paragraph argumentative essay outline that follows the Toulmin structure, tailored specifically to your prompt on football, ethics, and technology:

    Title: Challenging the Football Status Quo: Risk, Reform, and the Future of the Game

    I. Introduction

    • Hook: Open with a vivid image of a high-stakes NFL game—stadium roaring, players colliding, the quarterback limping off the field.
    • Context: Briefly explain how football’s cultural dominance is being challenged by increasing awareness of CTE, exploitation, and emerging safety technologies.
    • Thesis (Claim): Football must be fundamentally reformed in response to CTE research and technological advances—not to destroy the sport, but to preserve its integrity, protect its players, and allow it to evolve ethically in a changing society.

    II. Background

    • Define CTE and its connection to tackle football.
    • Summarize how football traditionally valorizes physical sacrifice and risk.
    • Introduce the ethical controversy: entertainment vs. exploitation.

    III. Point 1 – The Moral Imperative to Reform

    • Warrant: If a system knowingly causes irreversible harm, society has a duty to intervene.
    • Evidence: Reference studies on CTE and examples of players suffering post-retirement (e.g., Junior Seau, Aaron Hernandez).
    • Tie-in: Reform isn’t a moral overreach—it’s damage control.

    IV. Point 2 – Technology Makes Reform Feasible

    • Claim: Smart helmets, AI-driven impact analysis, and biometric wearables can reduce injury without eliminating physicality.
    • Evidence: Cite current innovations and their projected benefits.
    • Warrant: Technological reform isn’t fantasy—it’s already happening.

    V. Point 3 – True Player Choice Requires Full Awareness

    • Claim: Arguing that players “know the risks” assumes informed consent—but many players start young and lack full knowledge of long-term effects.
    • Evidence: Use Bachynski’s critique of youth football and the financial coercion tied to poverty.
    • Warrant: Informed choice is only valid when other viable opportunities exist.

    VI. Counterargument – The Tradition of Risk is Central to the Game

    • Present the argument: Football, like MMA or bodybuilding, is about voluntary risk and personal glory.
    • Use Noah’s and Daniel’s perspectives from Bodenner’s essay to show how some players accept risk with pride.
    • Acknowledge the emotional weight of this argument.

    VII. Rebuttal – Spectacle Doesn’t Justify Preventable Harm

    • Response: Cultural tradition is not a moral defense; sports have evolved before.
    • Use comparisons: NASCAR added safety after deaths, boxing implemented concussion protocols.
    • Argue that reform can preserve the game’s intensity without making sacrifice its currency.

    VIII. Broader Implications

    • Claim: Reforming football could ripple outward—setting ethical standards for other sports and youth programs.
    • Connect to societal values: Is our entertainment worth the human cost?
    • Suggest that football can remain powerful and inspiring without being a bloodsport.

    IX. Conclusion

    • Reaffirm thesis: Reform is not the death of football—it’s the only path to preserving it responsibly.
    • Emphasize the dual benefit: safer players and a sport that aligns with evolving cultural ethics.
    • Leave readers with a final image: a new generation of players thriving in a game that challenges them without destroying them.